This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
The summary description of Myrdal lists Raul Prebisch as one of three influences on him, but there is nothing in the rest of the text to justify this. Prebisch certainly was a great influence on late 20th century Third World development theory, but unless someone can come up with specifics to justify listing him as a great influence on Myrdal, the reference should be deleted.Isidorpax (talk) 00:43, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am deleting the last paragraph, which I have to believe was originally included for its sexual content, or for whatever weird reason, and certainly is not a representative part of the book An American Dilemma. I don't recall it at all from my college study of the book. Its inclusion here in such a short stub can serve no useful purpose; instead it merely serves to downgrade and denigrate a very useful and constructive book. Here the last paragraph is, as deleted, typo (I suppose "published" was intended in place of "publishes") and all:
Sociologist Gunnar Myrdal publishes a landmark study on whites' preoccupation with miscegenation, An American Dilemma. Myrdal and his researchers ask white Southerners to choose what they believe blacks most want from integration. The number one item on their list: "intermarriage and sexual intercourse with whites." This category ranks last for blacks.
The topic of intermarriage IS a very important topic. Its increase, more than anything else, helps reassure me (a white) that at least some real progress has been made since 1944. For7thGen01:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think someone knowledgeable in economic stuff could explain how come Myrdal, who apparently belonged to the Stockholm school and was thus, broadly speaking, Keynesian, could be awarded the economic version of the Nobel Prize along with Friedrich Hayek. This is most surprising. Was it some attempt at balancing, and giving the prize on one hand to a founder of neoliberalism thought, and to the other to a Keynesian? Or did they manage, an astounding feat, to make some work together despite their obvious ideological and economical differences? In any cases, this warrants explanations! Tazmaniacs18:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was widely interpretted as a balancing act. But the Committee didn't say something such as “We're including Myrdal to make it politically acceptable to give the Prize to Hayek.” Before the period of Keynesian hegemony, Hayek and Myrdal had both been part of a network of business cycle researchers. But Myrdal was glad to see Hayek cast into the wilderness, and outraged that the device of the Prize should have been used to retrieve him from exile. —SlamDiego13:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it ok and possible to mention their differing views. Specifically that Hayek never thought of Myrdal as a good economist. (I think Hayek's nobel lecture was an attack on Gunnar and his like) "No, it is certainly a rather extreme case combined with an intellectual arrogance that, even among economists, is rare. Myrdal has been in opposition on these issues even before Keynes came out. His book on monetary doctrines and values and so on dates from the late 1920s. He has his own peculiar view on this subject which I think is wrong. His book couldn't even be reproduced now. I don't think he has ever been a good economist."http://www.reason.com/news/show/33304.htmlKendirangu10:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but copyright law is different in Sweden. In Sweden, if the photog died before '44, or if the image was taken before '44 and the photog is untraceable, then the image is in the public domain. (Tangent: Unless the Wikipedia servers for http://sv.wikipedia.org/ are located in Sweden, I doubt that Wikipedia is on good legal ground invoking Swedish copyright law!) —SlamDiego18:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
I removed the additions by an IP that claimed Myrdal was an eugenicist. One reference for the removal would be Dan Korn's article『Till kulturrelativismens försvar』where he writes:
"Argumentationen mot rasbiologi i Alva och Gunnar Myrdals Kris i befolkningsfrågan (1934) påminner starkt, ibland nästan ordagrant, om Boas.
In the "Crisis in the Population Question" (1934) by Alva and Gunnar Myrdal, the argumentation against racial biology resembles strongly, sometimes almost by the letter, that of Boas.[1]"
The part about sterilisations in "Crisis in the Population Question" is largely a paraphrase of Franz Boas'sEugenics and in the book the Myrdals argued for environmentalism. I imagine that one of the lines Dan Korn had in mind was this one:
"individuals who are quite unfit for life" must be "thoroughly weeded out." Etzemüller.[2]
radikala utsovring av höggradigt livsodugliga individer Myrdals [3]
Compare the full sentence with what Boas wrote:
I närmaste planet ligger då givetvis den radikala utsovring av höggradigt livsodugliga individer, som kan åstadkommas genom sterilisering. Myrdal. [4]
The immediate application of eugenics is rather concerned with the elimination of strains that are a burden to the nation or to themselves, and to raise the standard of humanity by the suppression of the progeny of the defective classes. Boas.[5]
An awful lot of quote mining and other less scientific methods have been used to portray the Myrdals as eugenicists. In the sources used by the IP there is a problem with chronology: In the cited article by Franz Walter, the author, through juxtaposition, hints at a casual relationship from Crisis to the eugenics program:『Vieles von diesen Überlegungen floss in das Buch der Myrdals Die Krise der Bevölkerungsfrage 1934 ein. Im gleichen Jahr verabschiedete die sozialdemokratische Regierung eines der ambitioniertesten Eugenikprogramme überhaupt.』In other German sources the casuality is stated explicitly, such as: "Im Jahr 1934 erschien ihr Buch 'Eine Krise in der Bevölkerungsfrage', welches einen grossen Einfluss auf die Einführung des Sterilisationsgesetzes in Schweden hatte". (Achim Bühl.[6]). In her paper Rabenschlag wrote
Im schwedischen Reichstag wurde am 27. Februar 1934 von Georg Bissmark, Abgeordneter der Nationalen, ein Antrag auf die Möglichkeit der Zwangssterilisierung rechtsmündiger Personen gestellt. Der Antrag fand jedoch keine Zustimmung im Parlament; vgl. Riksdagens skrivelser, Motioner i Första kammaren, 1934, Nr. 306, 4. (Ann-Judith Rabenschlag, Für eine bessere "Bevölkerungsqualität", s. 64, fotnot 67 [7])
This is wrong. The private motion by Bissmark was passed and was the origin of the 1941 sterilisation act. Also, Bissmark was a conservative, not a member of the nationalist parliamentary group.
Därutöver beslöt emellertid riksdagen, i anledning bland annat av en av herr Bissmark (h) väckt motion (I: 306), att hos Kungl. Maj:t anhålla om utredning och förslag, på vad sätt regler i lag skulle fastställas beträffande frivillig sterilisering av rättskapabla personer. (Sociala meddelanden 1934, Nr 8 s. 533)[8]
Both the sterilisation act of 1934 and the motion by Bissmark were passed in May 1934.[9]Crisis in the Population Question was published in November the same year.[10]Edaen (talk) 21:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Also being a eugenicist suggests someone who has dedicated their professional activity to advocate or carry out eugenic policies. That certainly is not the case here. ·maunus · snunɐɯ·14:28, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
